A systematic review of latent class analysis in psychology: Examining the gap between guidelines and research practice.

IF 3.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Angela Sorgente, Rossella Caliciuri, Matteo Robba, Margherita Lanz, Bruno D Zumbo
{"title":"A systematic review of latent class analysis in psychology: Examining the gap between guidelines and research practice.","authors":"Angela Sorgente, Rossella Caliciuri, Matteo Robba, Margherita Lanz, Bruno D Zumbo","doi":"10.3758/s13428-025-02812-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Latent class analysis (LCA) can help identify unobserved classes of individuals in a population based on collected categorical data. It is commonly used in psychology to test hypotheses about sources of heterogeneity and class characteristics. However, careful decision-making is required in the modeling process. Its flexibility may explain why it is becoming more commonly used in psychology; however, it also highlights that there are many decision points in the modeling process, thus warranting a systematic literature review to document the use of LCA in psychology, mapping both the prevalence and quality of LCA studies. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and involved a comprehensive search across multiple databases, yielding 7,580 records related to latent class analysis. After removing duplicates and selecting a representative subsample, 377 documents were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 251 publications (comprising 313 LCAs) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were reviewed for this study. Each study was meticulously coded to map how the authors performed and reported each step of the LCA. Our analysis of these studies, in comparison with published guidelines, revealed notable discrepancies in how LCA is applied and reported. To support researchers in enhancing the quality of future LCA applications, we summarize key recommendations in a final section that outlines best practices for future LCA applications. The findings indicate a growing use of LCA in psychology but also highlight the need for greater methodological rigor and transparency in its implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":8717,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Research Methods","volume":"57 11","pages":"301"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12494633/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02812-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Latent class analysis (LCA) can help identify unobserved classes of individuals in a population based on collected categorical data. It is commonly used in psychology to test hypotheses about sources of heterogeneity and class characteristics. However, careful decision-making is required in the modeling process. Its flexibility may explain why it is becoming more commonly used in psychology; however, it also highlights that there are many decision points in the modeling process, thus warranting a systematic literature review to document the use of LCA in psychology, mapping both the prevalence and quality of LCA studies. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and involved a comprehensive search across multiple databases, yielding 7,580 records related to latent class analysis. After removing duplicates and selecting a representative subsample, 377 documents were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 251 publications (comprising 313 LCAs) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were reviewed for this study. Each study was meticulously coded to map how the authors performed and reported each step of the LCA. Our analysis of these studies, in comparison with published guidelines, revealed notable discrepancies in how LCA is applied and reported. To support researchers in enhancing the quality of future LCA applications, we summarize key recommendations in a final section that outlines best practices for future LCA applications. The findings indicate a growing use of LCA in psychology but also highlight the need for greater methodological rigor and transparency in its implementation.

心理学中潜在阶级分析的系统回顾:检查指南与研究实践之间的差距。
潜在类别分析(LCA)可以根据收集的分类数据,帮助识别种群中未观察到的个体类别。在心理学中,它通常用于检验关于异质性来源和阶级特征的假设。然而,在建模过程中需要谨慎的决策。它的灵活性可以解释为什么它在心理学中越来越常用;然而,它也强调了在建模过程中有许多决策点,因此有必要进行系统的文献综述,以记录LCA在心理学中的使用,绘制LCA研究的流行程度和质量。该系统评价遵循PRISMA指南,并在多个数据库中进行了全面搜索,产生了7580条与潜在类分析相关的记录。在去除重复并选择有代表性的子样本后,评估了377份文件的资格。其中,251篇出版物(包括313篇LCAs)符合纳入和排除标准,并被纳入本研究。每个研究都经过精心编码,以绘制作者如何执行和报告LCA的每个步骤。我们对这些研究的分析,与已发表的指南进行比较,揭示了LCA应用和报告的显着差异。为了支持研究人员提高未来LCA应用程序的质量,我们在最后一节中总结了关键建议,概述了未来LCA应用程序的最佳实践。研究结果表明,LCA在心理学中的应用越来越多,但也强调了在实施过程中需要更大的方法严谨性和透明度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.30%
发文量
266
期刊介绍: Behavior Research Methods publishes articles concerned with the methods, techniques, and instrumentation of research in experimental psychology. The journal focuses particularly on the use of computer technology in psychological research. An annual special issue is devoted to this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信